When certain legal matters reach an appeals court, the decision to overturn can rest on whether an initial finding was supported by substantial evidence. If a certain set of facts can produce multiple inferences or conclusions, and if the initial judge or jury acted reasonably, the decision can stand.
In the legislative branch, reaching agreement on a problem existing tends to be an easier first step compared to a consensus on a solution.
Consider House Bill 3008, from state Rep. Jed Davis, R-Yorkville. The identified problem is teachers spending personal money on school supplies. Davis’ solution is offering Classroom Supply Assistance Cards. Each school quarter, teachers would get a new allocation to spend on pre-approved items through “a needs-based formula taking into account school district funding, district poverty rates and Title 1 status, per-pupil spending disparities, student performance metrics, and teacher-to-student ratios.”
Illinois already offers the K-12 Instructional Materials and Supplies Tax Credit. Illinois income tax filers who are “teachers, instructors, counselors, principals or aides in a qualified school for at least 900 hours during a school year,” according to the Department of Revenue, can claim up to $500 per year on qualified purchases, which can “include ordinary and necessary expenses paid in connection with books, supplies [including nonathletic supplies for courses of instruction in health or physical education], equipment [including computer equipment, software and services] and other materials used in the classroom.”
The revenue department said more than 62,000 filers claimed the credit on 2022 returns. Back then the limit was $250, and the total claimed cleared $16.2 million.
Davis’ legislation doesn’t directly abolish the tax credit system, but it sure does sound a lot easier to functionally give teachers a supply allowance rather than having them compile receipts to apply for a credit that decreases their taxable income so hopefully, they owe the state a little bit less.
The idea does, however, require the state to have the money upfront. The legislation calls for funding to launch a two-year pilot program to start next August in “high-needs districts … to test the funding model and distribution process.” Davis’ plan calls for collaborating with major supply retailers and participating local businesses for streamlined purchasing, as well as creating online portals to manage funds and track purchases and compliance.
Another possible solution is for the state to just bulk purchase any supplies the program proposes to cover and distribute directly, perhaps through Regional Offices of Education. That could save taxpayers money, although eliminating the potential for the CSAC system to stimulate local retail economies statewide.
Each potential solution has upsides and drawbacks, but cooperative lawmakers should be able to negotiate. If one fix has been sufficiently attempted, trying another is reasonable.
• Scott T. Holland writes about state government issues for Shaw Local News Network. He can be reached at sholland@shawmedia.com.
:quality(70)/s3.amazonaws.com/arc-authors/shawmedia/55aeee77-0609-4323-931a-c6686fff01e6.png)